Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 10 Nov 2000 21:42:24 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 10 Nov 2000 21:42:14 -0500 Received: from nifty.blue-labs.org ([208.179.0.193]:54831 "EHLO nifty.Blue-Labs.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 10 Nov 2000 21:41:55 -0500 Message-ID: <3A0CB1ED.C38B7667@linux.com> Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 18:41:49 -0800 From: David Ford Organization: Blue Labs X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.0-test11 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Jeff V. Merkey" CC: sendmail-bugs@sendmail.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Wild thangs, was: sendmail fails to deliver mail with attachments in /var/spool/mqueue In-Reply-To: <20001110095227.A15010@sendmail.com> <3A0C37FF.23D7B69@timpanogas.org> <20001110101138.A15087@sendmail.com> <3A0C3F30.F5EB076E@timpanogas.org> <20001110133431.A16169@sendmail.com> <3A0C6B7C.110902B4@timpanogas.org> <3A0C6E01.EFA10590@timpanogas.org> <3A0C929B.EE6F7137@linux.com> <3A0C9277.273FA907@timpanogas.org> <3A0C96FD.8441F995@linux.com> <20001110202527.A3342@vger.timpanogas.org> Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------A8CB83D0EE4B167A1EE51A05" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------A8CB83D0EE4B167A1EE51A05 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > They're not modprobes, they're misnamed processes sleeping from NWFS. If they're sleeping, why are they in D state? That ups the load average. > I got the fix from someone so now they display their proper names. > top displays the names correctly, ps does not. Several people have > verified this problem, and all you are saying is that your servers > are never heavily loaded for long periods of time, say 200 hours > at a stretch of consatnt ftp traffic? If I had a normally expected constant load average that came very close to the sendmail configured limit, I would increase the limit. That's just common sense for an admin. Sendmail in itself doesn't affect the load average any more than any daemon does. If your normal operating load is significant, and your configured limits are close to that, you have to expect sendmail to throttle back. It doesn't pick large emails as it's victims, everything gets throttled. I would suspect that if you are near the limit then your disk is blocking causing a load spike which is detected by sendmail so sendmail throttles back. In my experience, Linux (and others) can be very sluggish at a load of 2 and at another time be quite responsive w/ a load of 200. An admin should configure limits based on that machine's load history, not any given default number. I've run sendmail for a lot of years at a lot of places. I've never seen this 'large emails aren't sent' issue that people have verified. The only reason I find valid is if the machine hovers near the limit and disk io causes the spike. That isn't sendmail's fault, it's a configuration fault. -d -- "The difference between 'involvement' and 'commitment' is like an eggs-and-ham breakfast: the chicken was 'involved' - the pig was 'committed'." --------------A8CB83D0EE4B167A1EE51A05 Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii; name="david.vcf" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Description: Card for David Ford Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="david.vcf" begin:vcard n:Ford;David x-mozilla-html:TRUE adr:;;;;;; version:2.1 email;internet:david@kalifornia.com title:Blue Labs Developer x-mozilla-cpt:;14688 fn:David Ford end:vcard --------------A8CB83D0EE4B167A1EE51A05-- - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/